VMware Live Recovery Reviews

My clients use the product for disaster recovery planning. 

The solution helps to improve business continuity processes. Its automatic failover and failback policies have been wonderful. 

VMware SRM needs to improve its pricing. 

I have been using the product for one to two years. 

I rate the tool's stability a six out of ten. We encountered a couple of issues with certification. 

I rate the tool's scalability a seven out of ten. 

I rate the tool's ease of deployment an eight out of ten. It takes a few hours to deploy. 

We achieved ROI in time when using the product. 

I rate the tool's pricing an eight to nine out of ten. 

Our clients are enterprise customers. I would recommend the products to others. Its scalability, its stability, syncing capabilities, and security features make it valuable. I rate the overall solution an eight out of ten. 

Our primary use is for our client. It's a system integrator frame. I have clients for whom we manage their data centers. Or, we do their integration and implementation. Basically, we use it to replicate their virtual machines, their user site, and their company site, and maybe to configure it and schedule their recovery. We use it for doing recovery tests from time to time, quarterly or yearly, for some of our clients. To test for a situation whereby a danger or a disaster could be affecting their data that is being replicated. This is good to do. Periodically, we run those tests and recover those virtual machines, and they try to work from their recovery sites to ascertain that everything is okay.

What I like about VMware is its capability to schedule, write and configure the recovery and scheduled steps, such that you don't have to come in and start manually trying to recover the entire machine. You just push a button to recover the VMware and everything is done.

What I think can be improved is the data replication aspect. For example, I know of another repetition solution called RP for VM. I don't really know how to use it since I've never used it before, but I've read about it. I know its features and I've spoken to some IT practitioners who have experience with RP for VM, who work with Dell EMC, and they gave me the feeling that RP for VM is better than VMware replication technology. The argument is that RP for VM has the ability to get your application going even when there is a loss of connectivity. Whereas in VMware you have to have something like 50% connectivity for the configuration. So in that respect, RP for VM has that feature which makes it better than VMware solutions. I guess VMware should make sure they are on top of their virtualization and data replication solution, more than every other company.

Overall, I can't point to any other thing, apart from whatever feature makes some people think artificial DNE is better than the replication application and SRM. If they can just take care of that then I don't think there's anything else.

I have been using VMware SRM for close to 6 years now.

I would say that it's stable. I think everything depends on how you design and manage your environment. For example, when it comes to data replication on the disaster recovery side, part of the challenge that most of our clients have is the link between the production site and the APR site. Sometimes the link will be having challenges and data replication won't work for a few minutes, or something like that. But I don't really think it's an issue with the VMware solution. So, I don't really have challenges with it. If you properly take care of your environment the virtual machines will not have issues. In your scenario, maybe you didn't configure your cluster very well, or your GRS is not working properly, or some virtual machines are not giving results - then most likely you are going to have challenges.

I have not scaled it before so I am not able to give feedback on that.

The environments we have deployed it on are enterprise environments, like the fashion wear industry, dotcom companies, and some other companies also.

The only time we've contacted VMware support was in a case where we had some virtual machines mistakenly deleted and they needed someone who was very experienced in VMware virtualization, someone who understood working from the command line in the process. They needed to do some troubleshooting from the command line. I was very new to VMware virtualization solutions at that point, so I had to contact support. But anyway, that was a long time ago, about 4 -5 years back, and I have not been in contact with them at support.

The initial setup is not that difficult. I would not say it's difficult because you just experience it when deploying some VMware solutions, especially a replication plan. The first time it's not always easy. But once you get the hang of it and get it right the first time, then you don't really have issues. Such as, do you need to go there and provide a key? I wouldn't say it's that difficult - it's not so straightforward but it's not that difficult. It's not complex for me.

I've done the deployment for different clients. So I would say the first time was not easy. But, for me to do it right now wouldn't take time.

My advice to people considering this solution is that they should just go ahead and get it. I think that is the best virtualization solution out there. Some people say Nutanix is better. I think VMware is the best. 

I would also advise making sure your virtual environment is well taken care of. I don't think there are any other challenges that you're going to have. It's necessary that when you see it side by side, to have an operations manager help you find problematic areas and possible issues you are going to encounter in the future.

On a scale of 1 - 10, I give it a 9.

In my area of expertise, which is resiliency, I primarily use VMware SRM for disaster recovery use cases. I also use it for backup and data loss prevention use cases, making it easier to manage and safeguard critical data within virtualized environments.

VMware SRM has improved our organization's value by consistently meeting our clients' time requirements when deploying solutions. When we implement SRM for our clients, it helps ensure that their disaster recovery and data protection needs are addressed within their expected timeframes. 

In terms of resiliency, the most valuable aspect of SRM has been its effectiveness.

There is room for improvement in the automation and orchestration aspects of this solution.

I have been using VMware SRM for ten years.

I would rate the stability of the solution as a seven out of ten. Like any software, we do encounter glitches and the need for patches and fixes from time to time, which is a normal part of maintenance. However, there is room for improvement in terms of patching processes, including reducing delays and addressing issues in applying patches. Additionally, better documentation would enhance the overall experience with the solution.

I would rate the scalability of VMware SRM as a six out of ten. Scalability challenges occur occasionally, especially during migrations from on-premises to the cloud, as it is often a gradual process over several months. Creating a financial model that aligns with this scalability can be quite challenging. Within our organization, which has a worldwide presence, approximately 90,000 people use this solution. However, in specific areas like the delivery organization and operations, the user count is in the hundreds.

I would rate the technical support as an eight out of ten.

Positive

I would rate the easiness of the initial setup as a seven out of ten. In our company, VMware SRM is deployed both on-premises and on the cloud. It took about two months to deploy it and it was done in-house. The number of staff required for deployment typically ranges from two to six people, depending on the size of the project. Maintenance for this solution is typically provided by the developers or vendors. We have maintenance agreements with various providers like VMware, Rubrik, Veeam, and Commvault, and hardware maintenance is handled by the hardware provider through our maintenance contracts.

I would give it an eight out of ten in terms of costliness.

Overall, I would rate VMware SRM as a seven out of ten.

In this scenario of disaster recovery, we start simply with our VMs. We have just two packs of 25 VMs. We just protect just about 15 VMs.

Thanks to SRM, we haven't had any kind of disaster in our environment.

The disaster recovery has been good. 

In the case of a disaster, the product is very simple. We have security and lower downtime. 

It's very reliable. The solution is stable. 

Its design is good and it does what it is intended to do. 

We are limited to 50 VMs.

The main limitation is the fact we can just activate the product in a disaster scenario. Sometimes we need to activate some VMs in the backup or disaster recovery sites, even if our main site is okay. However, in our current environment, we cannot do this due to the limitations of SRM.

The back sites sometimes are very, very complicated. It is the nature of the product. Sometimes we use vMotion to achieve this kind of objective.

We've used the solution for four years. 

The solution is stable. There are no bugs or glitches, and it doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable.

The soluton is scalable. We are doing preparing our environment to be active site-to-site - both the production site and secondary site.

We have 900 people in total on the solution. 

We're in the process of changing things now. 

Technical support is good. We've been very pleased with the responsiveness and helpfulness. 

Positive

We've only used SRM. We did not use anything previously.

More or less, due to the product itself, it's relatively easy to set up. However, in our environment, we have a VM, and that VM application is very complicated. Sometimes we have some issues in running this application on the backup site. This is not due to this SRM. Rather, it is due to our environment.

The deployment took about two years. 

We have a team of four people that can handle deployment and maintenance duties. They are all specialists. 

Sometimes we talk to the local reseller of VM products. We also consult with the vendor of the hardware product. In Brazil, for the government, we have a procurement process. It is not personal. We can just publish our request for a quotation. Any local reseller or national reseller can offer their services.

We've never calculated ROI. 

We pay 400,000 Brazilian Reals for the license. There are no other fees associated with the product.

Most of our VMs are VMware. However, we are changing some VM products, and maybe we will use something else. We are just evaluating at this time. We haven't really seriously evaluated anything. We just update our existing license to support and update.

We are just a customer. 

I'm not sure which version of the product we're using. However, we are updating right now, in the next month. 

Right now, our environment is on-prem. We want to install the hyper-converged to start moving to the cloud.

I'd advise others to maintain the solution and keep it up to date. 

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten. 

The primary use case is for disaster recovery. We use the solution for two different sites, as well as our virtual machine backup. In a situation where one of our data centers goes down, our servers can go up on the other site.

The most valuable feature of the solution is the automatic recovery of the virtual machine if it goes down. In the event the VM goes down, we can either power it up automatically or manually depending on how we have the solution configured. When configured to power up automatically, the copy in the VM will power up.

The solution currently has a five-minute RPO, meaning if the VM goes down we can lose up to five minutes of data which is a big deal when it relates to database replication. The solution can be improved by reducing the RPO time to zero.

I have been using the solution for five years.

The solution is stable.

The solution is scalable. We only need to add a host whenever we want to expand our cluster.

The initial setup is straightforward and user-friendly. Depending if everything in the network layer is okay, we can configure VMware SRM for both sites in less than an hour or less. The replication process will depend on the size of the VM, so if the VM is large enough, the replication process will take some time. However, the configuration of SRM is straightforward.

The implementation was completed in-house.

We have a standard enterprise license for the solution.

The cost may be based on the number of simultaneous replication which is the limitation of the standard.

I give the solution a nine out of ten.

The deployment and maintenance can be done by one engineer.

I am the consultant solution architect, and sometimes I am the deployment engineer.

I seldom ask for support from VMware because most of the problems are caused by bugs, which we can usually fix ourselves by consulting the knowledge base on the VMware website. However, there are times when the problem is at the hardware level and VMware is not at fault - for example when there is a bug in the VMware version used by the hardware vendor. In these cases, we need to ask for support from the hardware vendor.

VMware SRM is a great solution. I always recommend the solution because it is a native replication solution for VMware. Although there are other solutions such as Zerto, they may deliver a lower RPO in certain cases. I believe Zerto is a better solution than VMware SRM, but when it comes to functionality, and for regular customers, VMware SRM is enough.

We are using this solution to serve our customers in different sectors.

We are using VMware SRM as a disaster recovery solution for our customers. We are working with vSphere, vSAN, and other infrastructure VMware solutions. VMware SRM is completing the solution.

VMware SRM is very effective between two sites with identical twin storage, you can have synchronization between the two sites. 

We have had an issue when some customers have traditional designs and sites. For example, on one another site, they are using hyper-converged, using VMware, or Nutanix. We have a problem with the synchronization between the storage for site to site. This is the main issue. We are adding some other tools to support the synchronization to allow the movement of the workload from site to site easily.

Not all customers have VMware in all workloads. Some customers have a difference, VMware environments, such as Red Hat or Nutanix. VMware SRM is very effective for VMware customers. However, when you have other workflows with other vendors, you can not always use this solution.

I have been using VMware SRM for approximately 12 years.

VMware SRM we mainly use for our mid-size business customers. For small business-sized customers, we have different solutions we can deliver, such as Veeam. If they are a small customer that does not have a professional DR site we have a variety of solutions we can deliver depending on the customer's needs.

Enterprise businesses have many VM and the amount depends on the design of the data centers, which storage is being used, or is it hyper-converged or converged. We are choosing the best solution depending on the customer's need.

When comparing the difference between VMware SRM and Dell EMC RecoverPoint there are many differences between them both. VMware SRM is an automated tool for disaster recovery, RecoverPoint can do a similar job but it has better protection more than an automated tool for moving VMs. 

With our customers, we are delivering both solutions, Recovery Point and SRM, because they already had the Dell EMC storage and owned Dell Recovery Point, we only added the VMware SRM tool for moving the VMs and storing them from site to site, as an automated tool.

Dell RecoverPoint has the edge over VMware SRM in one area because they can work with other vendors, not only Dell EMC. Some customers have workloads on the cloud, Dell RecoverPoint is very effective for them.

I have used Veeam and other solutions.

The price of VMware SRM depends on how many VMs the customer has to move. There is a difference between the standard and enterprise license. I'm presenting the standard license to my customers because the total of VMs is not more than 50. The customer needs only the standard license and the cost is very effective for him.

I rate VMware SRM an eight out of ten.

We have implemented SRM to replicate around the 800 virtual machines to the data recovery files. Due to the fact that we implemented to data centers as well as the primary and secondary data center, we use SRM to replicate around most of the virtual machines in order to be the secondary site.

If you can plan and create a recovery plan correctly, it will do and replicate virtual machines and when a disaster occurs, you can easily replicate off the secondary site. If you create a proper primary recovery plan, you have good protection.

The most important features that we're using are the replication of VMs as well as the integration with the EMC recovery platform. The replication solutions to replicate the LAN and data storage to the secondary external storage.

The solution is quite stable. We haven't had an issue with the performance.

The solution is very flexible. 

VMware introduced the two next versions of the solution. They are SRM 6.5 and 6.7. I don't have any experience with these two products. However, if I was to talk about version 6, which we are using, at that time we faced a problem specifically when we create recovery plans. After the creation of the recovery plan, sometimes an issue happened in the GUI, in the Center. I'm not sure if that has since been resolved.

We've faced issues with the licensing. If you don't choose a specific license, you can only cover around five or ten virtual machines.

The biggest issue for us is that this product does not have any demo for customers. They should offer demos so that clients can try it out before they commit to buying a license.

At this point, I have been using the solution for about two or three years.

The stability of the solution is very good. There aren't bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It is reliable.

In terms of scalability, you can integrate the POC and you can distribute SRM on three sites. At our project, we use VPLEX architecture to distribute storage between two data centers and therefore we could publish an important file related to SRM virtual machines and the active LANs, which is distributed between two data centers. In terms of scalability and holding of data storage, we can put a doc online whenever we need to.

Our team has around six members for virtual support and maintenance of the VMware infrastructure. In terms of the customers that are related to using the VMware services, there are around 800 people.

Due to the sanctions in my country, in Iran, we can not use direct support from VMware and there is not a partner in my country. Therefore, we need to study, we need to design, we need to support everything directly and focus on providing maintenance service to our customers ourselves.

The initial setup is very straightforward. It's not too complex. 

Deployments can typically take two months.

In the first month, I dedicate focus on learning and conducting POC sessions. For around two or three weeks, I also spend some time implementing SRM at the site.

I am responsible directly for installations.

I work with a specific team that includes three members. I'm responsible as a team lead and VMware engineer. I have two other team members, one member has a specific focus on its storage concept and another is working on the networking.

We are always looking for solutions that are more affordable. SRM is more expensive than, for example, VirtualBox.

I have looked into Zerto. I attended a seminar two years ago. If we ever moved off of this solution, we may switch to that. It is quite affordable and is very hands-on. It may even be easier in terms of deployment. They are very similar solutions overall.

We are using two product versions. We are using product versions 6.0 and 6.5.

We need to use only on-premises deployment models. This due to the fact that there are sanctions in my country. We cannot use the cloud services directly as there is no support.

For customers who are using VMware infrastructure, I recommend using VMware SRM due to the fact that it has the ability to integrate with other products like HP, SRA, or even CSRA. It has good features that integrate well with a storage concept.

Overall, I would rate the solution at an eight out of ten.

VMware SRM is used for our disaster recovery site, which is an on-premises colo (Colocation) facility. The general use case is for disaster recovery for three of our applications those being imaging, payroll, and real estate.  

I would say SRM's ability to recover my virtual machines in a timely manner and to perform bi-annual testing are the two things it has provided that are really valuable.  

I would say VMware has room for improvement with this product. I am sure it is probably better in their 7.0 version, but there are still some bugs in the 6.O version that relates to using it with different browsers. I think a lot of what I run into is related to the 6.0 version. I believe a lot of those bugs have been fixed in the UI once you upgrade to 7.0.  

We have been using the VMware SRM solution for about six years.  

The stability of SRM has been excellent. I would give it a nine-out-of-ten. It is a pretty solid solution.  

I believe it would probably scale just fine. I only protect 25 VMs based on our licensing and I do it that way even though I actually have about 200 virtual servers. I can not really say I have done a lot to test scalability. In the six years that I have been dealing with SRM, I have just been protecting those 25 VMs. I do not have hands-on experience as to how well it would scale out.  

I have dealt with the technical support at times in the last year. I would give VMware's tech support a nine-out-of-ten. They are responsive and get you a useful reply.  

Disaster recovery was completely done with physical servers prior to when we started using VMware. When we went to VMware, we started using SRM. So the first time we went with the virtual environment we deployed SRM. We just went straight with SRM just because it is a VMware product. It was already well-integrated and did what we needed it to do.  

The installation and initial setup were pretty straightforward. The deployment, overall, was pretty straightforward. There was a little implementation structure we had to factor in related to my storage array. But besides that, it was pretty straightforward and easy enough all the way around.  

I pay for SRM per year. It is about $3,000 a year for the 25 pack. The package gives you the ability to protect up to 25 virtual machines.  

From what I have seen, a lot of these new hyper-converged systems come with certain components that do a lot of what SRM does. My opinion and advice to people considering SRM would be to look to your hardware vendor or consultant. They may have some replication pieces in there that allow you to possibly not use SRM or go ahead and stay with what you already have. Depending on your situation, different combinations might prove more beneficial either within the architecture or by cost-benefit. There are a lot of options out there now for disc replication and bringing machines up at other locations.  

On a scale from one to ten (where one is the worst and ten is the best), I would rate the SRM as about an eight-out-of-ten.